Quote:



Why not just forget the cables for awhile and get the headphone in your price range that seems most attractive to you... 580/600 are nearly identical in sound, 650 is a step up.

The Headsave Transit is both capable and suitable for driving Senns (unless you specifically requested some lower gain value like 4.6, which might be too low in some situations).

One step at a time, imo... get the cans, try them with your current amp/source... then kick back and upgrade at your leisure... no need to do everything at once. The stock cable is fine in my opinion, and altho you may get sonic changes with $200 aftermarket cables, there are a few people around here who actually prefer the sound of the stock cable. A few others (like myself) think it foolish to spend as much (or more) on a cable than you paid for the headphones themselves.

Yeah, I think I am going to get the HD-580 with stock cable.
If I love the higher end Senn sound, I'll upgrade the cable/phone at my leisure (as you said ).
My Transit has a gain of 10, so I assume it can drive these beasts .
I am looking for a used Marantz CDP, would that be a nice entry rig with the Transit and ER-4P/S and HD-580?
Those Monster interconnects sound pretty sweet as well; I might throw those in.

What CDP do you guys recommend? I am looking to spend around $200 - $300, and used or new is no matter to me. As long as it boosts my enjoyment, it stays.

BANGPOD

Hmm.. if you get really lucky, maybe you'll find a Philips 963sa for $300 used? They're about $400 brand new. Good quality source for entry-level.. you get SACD + DVD + CD as well....

Otherwise, NAD 541i is a good player too, and you should be able to find those used for $300 or so.. maybe slightly over.

I'm must have had a bum pair. I found them overly, smooth and a congested midrange. I ended up sending them back. Weird.

Quote:



In a direct comparison, what are the differences between the Philips 963SA and the NAD 541i? If I might ask, is SACD that much better than regular CD? If it is, then I might consider SACD-compatability as one of my prime concerns. How does a Marantz receiver match up to these two? Or, is it generally best that I stick with either the Phillips or the NAD as my options? So, either of these CD players to a Headsave Transit (or Gilmore V2 in the short future) connected to HD-XXX would be an enjoyable home rig? I also have the ER-4P and P to S adapter, would these pair nicely with the HD-XXX's or would my set up favor one over the other?

BANGPOD

JaZZ,

I understand. I don't mind a bit of extra bass, and I'm not really upset that much by what I'm hearing. If anything, I love the bass extension and bass texture, it's better than the 600s by a hair.

The midrange of the 650s is EXQUISITE. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being the HD600s playing a piano recording and 10 being hearing the piano in reynolds, the HD650s get a 6 for soundstage and 8 for texture. They're THAT good. Wow.

Detail is incredible. I'm listening to nine inch nails right now. Lots of detail, even though the recording isn't audiophile. Bass is punchy. Mids are recessed on this CD, but they were just as much on the hd600s. The 650s seem to have more midrange energy.

These things are getting better.

Cheers,
Geek

Lextek,

I understand where you're coming from. The midrange is buried beneath the thick bass right now, but the soundstage and imaging is more precise on the 650s from what I'm hearing. On good recordings these things just shine.

I think the HD600s do have more treble energy and are a hair brighter than the 650s.

I need to do more listening and compare between the 600 and 650 on a high end vinyl setup before I truly decide which headphone is superior.

Right now I'm liking the 650 more, but it's not going to be everyone's cup of tea, and a lot of HD600 lovers may not prefer it over the 650s.

Also,

I played the infamous 20-20khz test tone and guess what I heard?

Much less of an 8.5 khz gap, in fact, there is a gap there, but it's over twice as wide a distance and it's far less deep. With the HD600s it drops dramatically to almost nothing at 8.5khz, with the 650s it just mellows out a bit.

Both headphones have the same HF extension, the 600s emphasize the highs a bit more though around 10-12khz to my ears.

Cheers,
Geek

Here are my opinions to a couple of the questions asked so far in this thread.
1. midrange on the HD650's with any cable is much, much better than the K501. Not even close.
2. The HD650 with stock cord is a much better headphone than the HD600 with the equinox, Zu, or cardas.
3. No headphone I've owned to date can pump out bass like the HD650's with any of the cables I've used on them. NOT EVEN CLOSE!
The HD650/Zu cable and the Singlepower SDS amp combo is so much better than any of my other headphones and amp combos, that I sold off everything else this week. The one thing I find lacking is the upper freq. could be better. But I'll live.

Quote:



Wow my ears must be shot?????

Lextek,

You said that the worst part about the HD650s was a blurred incoherent midrange. Were there any other things that you had noticed?

I think the HD650's midrange is liquid smooth and tonally transparent, but it's on the slow side nonetheless.

Again I'm at about the tenth or twelfth hour of break-in.

Cheers,
Geek

Switching back to the HD600s:

The 600s are crisper and cleaner at this stage. The sound is definitely a bit darker with the HD650s. The midrange is clean and tight on the HD600, but liquid and tonally accurate on the HD650. Highs are extremely detailed on both headphone, but they sound more etched on the 600s.

Bass is blacker and less colored on the HD650s, but it's also thicker. I don't hear so much of that rolloff below 80hz with the HD650s.

Cheers,
Geek

I burnt mine in for a week. The midrange killed me. The high were very, smooth. I guess if I didn't keep going back and forth between the 600s and 650s I would have been better off. Plus I was use to the 600s. The 650s sounded muffled overall to me. I'm sure they were "burnt in". The stock cable was better than the Cardas! The Cardas pumped up the bottom and top and the middle was left behind. TME (to my ears). I had a brief time with the Headroom Max and 650s. I must say they sounded pretty, good with the crossfeed on and filter on bright or brighter. Maybe they were made for each other?

Quote:



You should take this to the Source forum and post it there.. there's plenty of people who's had experiences with either one of these CD players to give you a good idea. (They're both pretty popular items for that $300 to $400 range)

I have to admit though, my experience with sources are very limited. I've heard a NAD 541i very extensively, and I'm very impressed by it. I can't compare to anything else in that same class though, since I really haven't had the pleasure of being able to experience something in that same class.

Philips 963sa is generally considered a very good bargain, because it does qualify as a good entry-level player for audiophile quality, and it does SACD as well. Based on pure CD playback though, it might not be as good as the NAD 541i. Again, I'm not sure about this at all. Source forum...

SACD has a much higher sampling rate, so even 2-channel SACD tracks should in general, sound better than CD, unless they screwed up the mastering. SACD was made with audiophiles in mind, and supposedly make those people who miss the smoothness of vinyls move into the digital age. In my personal experience, SACD has sounded at least a little better than their CD counterparts. Granted, my source for SACD is nowhere near audiophile quality.. so it's skewed.

The multi-channel part of SACD is very attractive, I haven't tried hooking it up to my home system for testing yet. However, the multi-channel will most likely, not downmix into 2-channel sound at all. Most SACD has separate 2-channel tracks than the surround tracks.

One more thing.

If you think the highs are too relaxed with HD600s, the 650s will NOT suit you, as they are even smoother up top.

Cheers,
Geek

Lextek,

Thanks for the quick reply. I see your point. I'm not really quite sure if I have the same problem; while I do think the bass is tremendous on the 650s the highs are level with the mids or even less than them at this stage. The HD600s sound a bit hashed in the highs with less definition. Just my opinion to this date.

The HD600s sound more magical, if that's what one is after. The HD650s sound less "magical," but I hear a treble etch and hash going back to the HD600s.

The midrange is just astounding on the 650s right now.

Cheers,
Geek